(2026:JHHC:20343 ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P (C) No. 2877 of 2021 ----- 1. Mojamil Haque, aged about 40 years, Son of Noor Islam. 2. Bani Israil, aged about 38 years, Son of Md. Illyas, Both are resident of Village-Palasbona, P.O.-Palasbona, P.S.- Barharwa, Dist.-Sahibganj. … Petitioners(s). Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary, Agriculture and Sugarcane Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O. & P.S.-Doranda, Dist.-Ranchi. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj, P.O. and P.S.-Sahibganj, Dist. Sahibganj. 4. The Land Conservation Officer, Sahibganj, Office at District Agriculture Office Campus, Kisan Bhawan, P.O. & P.S.- Sahibganj, Dist.-Sahibganj 5. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sahibjanj, P.O. &. P.S.-Sahibganj, Dist.-Sahibganj. 6. The Circle Officer, Barharwa, P.O. & P.S.-Barharwa, Dist.- Sahibganj. 7. Abdul Gafur, Son of Late Muslim Sheikh, Resident of Village- Palasbona, P.O.-Palasbona, P.S.-Barharwa, Dist.-Sahibganj. … Respondent(s). CORAM :SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioners(s) : Md. Asadul Haque, Advocate For the respondent(s) :Mr. Ashok Kr. Yadav, Sr. S.C.-I …...... 02/09.07.2026: 1. Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner is giving up his prayer no. 2. He is pressing the prayer no. 1 which is for the release of the admitted amount which the petitioner has spent for renovating the pond in question. 3. From the writ petition and the counter-affidavit, the fact which is admitted is that work was to renovate the pond in question which was awarded to the petitioner. (2026:JHHC:20343 ) 2 It was on the recommendation of MLA which is evident from the counter-affidavit. The work order was also issued to the petitioner for renovation and the petitioner has done some work. In the meantime, private respondents objected on the ground that the tank belong to them and petitioner was stopped from making any further renovation work. 4. In paragraph 20 of the counter-affidavit, the State has admitted that they have measured the work and found that the cost of work done was Rs. 1,70,600/-. They also states that the President and Secretary of the Committee became adamant. Further in paragraph 19, it has been mentioned that the C.O, Braharwa informed the D.C. Sahibganj that the land is private in nature and thus, the renovation work of the said pond was stopped vide Letter No. 168 dated 12.12.2015, and, thereafter, the measurement was done. 5. From the aforementioned facts, it is clear that the work was allotted to the petitioner. It is also admitted that the petitioner has spent Rs. 1,70,600/- which the petitioner is now entitled to. The State also in their counter-affidavit admitted that the work was recommended by the concerned MLA, Shri Alamgir Alam of Barharwa Block. 6. The fact that the pond belongs to a private person, is not disputed. It is also not disputed that the respondents State authorities had spent Government money for renovating the private pond at the instance of some of the local villagers including the MLA. It is also not disputed that the petitioner has done work to the tune of Rs. 1,70,600. 7. Because of this irresponsible attitude and approach of the Govt. authorities, the petitioner, who is a petty private contractor cannot be penalised, nor payment of his due amount can be denied. 8. Thus, I direct the State to pay the amount of Rs. 1,70,600/- to the petitioner immediately within three weeks and initiate a proceeding against all persons who had recommended and approved renovation of the work, including the members of the village Committee and the Gram Sabha for recovering the said amount from them as the tax payers amount has been spent in this contract. The entire process of (2026:JHHC:20343 ) 3 recovery should be concluded within six months and, thereafter, be reported to this Court by the Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj. 9. This writ petition stands allowed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 09.07.2026 Rashmi/-